The Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed Texas to smash through more than a century of precedent around federal supremacy over immigration law, with some members of the Court’s conservative majority citing procedural concerns to do so.
It seems like supreme court playing politics.
If they can’t justify overturning a century of precedent permanently, they can at least overturn it temporarily until it comes back to them in a year.
Wow. Again Alito and crew cannot help but break things - but, of course, that’s what they’re there for, isn’t it?
In dissent, Sotomayor is devastatingly specific about the rotten details. Kagan just cuts their heads off.
CSA is coming…“Nonetheless, the decision to allow Texas’ state deportation law to take effect signals a fundamental openness to SB 4’s central proposition: that the federal government does not have supremacy over the states in border enforcement.”
“It sets up a mind-boggling conflict between state and federal authority. A person with federal permission to be in the United States could now face 20 years in Texas prison if they ignore an order, issued by a Texas state judge under the law, to leave the country.”
With the Suicidal Six now firmly behind the wheel, our once-venerable SCOTUS is rapidly approaching Cartman stature.
I will never forgive them for the incalculable damage they’ve done to the public’s perception of the court’s Constitutional role and legitimacy.
It’s just breathtakingly sad – and it’s going to take a long, long time to repair.
(If that’s even possible.)
The ruling opens the door to a morass of potential issues. Per federal law, those seeking asylum have the right to protection — including to stay in the United States — until a determination is made as to whether or not they qualify. The Supreme Court’s decision could then pit state and federal officials with competing and undefined obligations against each other.
I’m intrigued to understand how the SCOTUS is going to square this circle with federal obligations around asylum.
Something like this:
The Supreme Court jumped the shark in December 2000 with Bush V Gore. It’s been downhill since that case.
I’m intrigued to understand how the SCOTUS is going to square this circle with federal obligations around asylum.
There not, at least until a Republican is president then they may change their tune. I think so long as a Democrat is president, chaos is the what they want.
Amazing isn’t it!? Bet you couldn’t get a pic of a maga fool and a sane person like this.
That they got away with it in Bush v Gore has only encouraged them to go farther and disregard the constitution completely.
Oh, that’s easy! The Equal Sovereign Dignity of The States simply means that individual states can always be more conservative than the federal government, but never more liberal …
Here we go again folks – down the road to nullification: states can ignore the federal laws they don’t like and usurp the federal powers they crave.
Fort Sumter, here we come.
We have entered “banana republic” territory.
For now, huh?
How many lives will be taken or lost ‘for now’, justices?
How many?
If you’re ok with even one life ‘for now’, you are a monster.
Goosing the odds in the Presidential election.
MAGA judges are out of control.
Xenophobia is the supreme law of the land, America is officially over.
